Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in the Context of an Aerosol-Borne Infectious Disease: Comparison between the Jaeger Oxycon Pro and the COSMED Quark RMR Metabolic Carts

Several factors, such as internal algorithm, sensor technology, and obsolescence might skew outcomes when comparing different gas analysers measurements during CPET. Besides aerosol borne infectious disease are a source of contamination during cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET). Thus, the main aim of this study was to determine the agreement degree between the Quark RMR and the Jaeger Oxycon Pro, using an antibacterial filter with the latter. Forty-two participants (19-54 years old) performed two non-consecutive maximal graded exercise tests on a cycle-ergometer on two counterbalance and different days using the Oxycon Pro and the Quark RMR in a randomized order. Differences between devices were tested using a generalized linear model adjusted by Bonferroni, and correlation and agreement was assessed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient (R), intraclass coefficient correlation (ICC), Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and Bland-Altman plots. No significant differences were found between devices in any of metabolic or ventilatory parameters for cardiorespiratory fitness assessment (VO2max: 3131.3±882.1 vs. 3189.8±894.8, p=0.071, VCO2max: 3436.3±936.0 vs. 3550.3±1043.2, p=0.071, for Quark RMR and Oxycon Pro, respectively). However, Bland-Altman plots showed a trivial tendency towards Oxycon Pro overestimation relative to Quark RMR as air flow volume increases. Both devices showed strong correlation and high level of agreement during maximal and submaximal exercise intensities (Pearson’s R: 0.974 & 0.977; ICC: 0.985 & 0.987; Lin’s CCC: 0.971 & 0.974, for VO2 and VCO2, respectively). Therefore, providing consistency to CPET data comparison between both devices, and insight into whether the use of these metabolic carts could be interchangeable or combined when a single device cannot be used for CPET assessment.